How Multi-Tasking Ability Impacts Performance, Workload, Situation Awareness, Stress and Trust with Simulated Imperfect Automation.

IF 3.6 3区 心理学 Q1 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Human Factors Pub Date : 2026-08-01 Epub Date: 2026-03-10 DOI:10.1177/00187208261431968
Jayden N Greenwell-Barnden, Troy A W Visser, Shayne Loft, Susannah J Whitney, Vanessa K Bowden
{"title":"How Multi-Tasking Ability Impacts Performance, Workload, Situation Awareness, Stress and Trust with Simulated Imperfect Automation.","authors":"Jayden N Greenwell-Barnden, Troy A W Visser, Shayne Loft, Susannah J Whitney, Vanessa K Bowden","doi":"10.1177/00187208261431968","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>ObjectiveThis study investigated whether individual differences in multi-tasking ability (MTa) modulate the benefit and cost of supervising imperfect automation on performance, workload, situation awareness, stress, and trust in simulated air traffic control (ATC).BackgroundAutomation is rarely perfectly reliable, and automation failures can have significant detrimental effects. Prior work established that MTa can modulate the benefit of perfectly reliable automation. However, it is unknown whether MTa influences the cost of supervising imperfect automation.MethodsMTa was indexed using a latent factor from three cognitive tasks completed by 113 undergraduate students. Participants completed two ATC blocks: one without automation (manual) and one with automated assistance for accepting incoming aircraft, handing-off outgoing aircraft, and conflict detection (violations of minimum separation). Conflict detection automation was perfectly reliable. Automation highlighting aircraft needing acceptance and hand-off was imperfect, missing 30% of events (the \"unreliable\" trials).ResultsLower-MTa participants obtained greater performance benefits to aircraft hand-off from reliable-automation but suffered greater costs from unreliable automation compared to manual hand-off, relative to higher-MTa participants. Situation awareness was improved by automation provision, and workload reduced, although MTa did not vary these effects. Stress reduction with automation, compared to manual, was greater for lower-MTa compared to higher-MTa participants. Higher-MTa participants calibrated trust across the different reliability of ATC tasks more effectively.ConclusionMTa can lead to differentiated effects of imperfect automation on aircraft hand-off, perceived stress and trust.ApplicationMTa may warrant consideration in personnel hiring and role selection for work contexts where automation reliability is volatile.</p>","PeriodicalId":56333,"journal":{"name":"Human Factors","volume":" ","pages":"1056-1077"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13260769/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Factors","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208261431968","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ObjectiveThis study investigated whether individual differences in multi-tasking ability (MTa) modulate the benefit and cost of supervising imperfect automation on performance, workload, situation awareness, stress, and trust in simulated air traffic control (ATC).BackgroundAutomation is rarely perfectly reliable, and automation failures can have significant detrimental effects. Prior work established that MTa can modulate the benefit of perfectly reliable automation. However, it is unknown whether MTa influences the cost of supervising imperfect automation.MethodsMTa was indexed using a latent factor from three cognitive tasks completed by 113 undergraduate students. Participants completed two ATC blocks: one without automation (manual) and one with automated assistance for accepting incoming aircraft, handing-off outgoing aircraft, and conflict detection (violations of minimum separation). Conflict detection automation was perfectly reliable. Automation highlighting aircraft needing acceptance and hand-off was imperfect, missing 30% of events (the "unreliable" trials).ResultsLower-MTa participants obtained greater performance benefits to aircraft hand-off from reliable-automation but suffered greater costs from unreliable automation compared to manual hand-off, relative to higher-MTa participants. Situation awareness was improved by automation provision, and workload reduced, although MTa did not vary these effects. Stress reduction with automation, compared to manual, was greater for lower-MTa compared to higher-MTa participants. Higher-MTa participants calibrated trust across the different reliability of ATC tasks more effectively.ConclusionMTa can lead to differentiated effects of imperfect automation on aircraft hand-off, perceived stress and trust.ApplicationMTa may warrant consideration in personnel hiring and role selection for work contexts where automation reliability is volatile.

模拟不完全自动化下多任务处理能力对绩效、工作量、态势感知、压力和信任的影响。
目的探讨多任务处理能力的个体差异是否会调节模拟空中交通管制(ATC)中监督不完全自动化的绩效、工作量、态势感知、压力和信任的收益和成本。自动化很少是完全可靠的,并且自动化失败会产生重大的有害影响。先前的研究表明,MTa可以调节完全可靠的自动化带来的好处。然而,MTa是否会影响监督不完善自动化的成本尚不清楚。方法从113名大学生完成的三项认知任务中选取一个潜在因子,对smta进行索引。参与者完成了两个ATC模块:一个没有自动化(手动),另一个有自动化辅助,用于接收进入的飞机,移交离开的飞机,以及冲突检测(违反最小间隔)。冲突检测自动化是完全可靠的。自动化显示需要验收和移交的飞机并不完美,错过了30%的事件(“不可靠”的试验)。结果与高mta参与者相比,低mta参与者从可靠自动化中获得了更大的性能收益,但与人工移交相比,低mta参与者遭受了更大的成本。自动化的提供改善了态势感知,减少了工作量,尽管MTa没有改变这些效果。与手动相比,自动化对低mta参与者的压力减轻程度比高mta参与者更大。高mta的参与者更有效地对ATC任务的不同可靠性进行了信任校准。结论mta会导致不完全自动化对飞机交接、感知压力和信任的不同影响。在自动化可靠性不稳定的工作环境中,应用mta可能需要考虑人员雇用和角色选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Human Factors
Human Factors 管理科学-行为科学
CiteScore
10.60
自引率
6.10%
发文量
99
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society publishes peer-reviewed scientific studies in human factors/ergonomics that present theoretical and practical advances concerning the relationship between people and technologies, tools, environments, and systems. Papers published in Human Factors leverage fundamental knowledge of human capabilities and limitations – and the basic understanding of cognitive, physical, behavioral, physiological, social, developmental, affective, and motivational aspects of human performance – to yield design principles; enhance training, selection, and communication; and ultimately improve human-system interfaces and sociotechnical systems that lead to safer and more effective outcomes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书